PG Music Home Forums General Discussion Beginners Forum What is the least difficult way to learn to play an Instrument?

I assume some people start learning to sight read on day one, and others start learning by ear.
I am beginning to think that my inability to become skilled at sight-reading music has made things more difficult. Not that I can't read at all, but certainly not well enough to play something put in front of me.

Is it faster to learn music in a classical way?

Billy

What instruments are you interested in? For instance guitar,being so visual and pattern based can certainly be learned to a very high degree without reading standard notation.

I am interested in playing guitar, bass, piano, organ, drums, and various synthesizers.

The question came up when trying to learn to play Whiter Shade Of Pale on B3.

I was missing a couple of notes in my right hand, which became evident when I looked at the sheet music. After reading the sheet music, the bass pattern was also less of a problem to understand.

Billy

Define 'play an instrument'
My kids could 'play' drums at 3 .. no idea what they were doing, but they thought they were playing.

Nothing beats a good fundamental understanding of theory. Then you can 'transpose' it to any keyboard, fretboard or what have you.
The ability to read music kinda comes along with that, IMO.

If you could look at the sheet music and realize what you were missing when trying by ear, that's an example.of the above!

When auditioning some guitarists and bassists for my wedding band I found a number of them that fit into that "play" category, and they were a lot older than 3!


You are spot on about learning basic theory and reading.

Have a Merry Christmas.

Well, what I was getting at was being able to play a song the way it was initially recorded.

One can play Whiter Shade Of Pale on the guitar, and people would recognize the song, but it is a classic B3 song.

It can be played on B3 with a less complex bass line and sounds good, and one can interpret the original in many ways.

What became apparent to me was that although I could hear Procol Harum playing the song and duplicate most of the notes, I was missing things. Only when I looked at the sheet music, did I understand what I did not know.

The question then becomes, why start out trying to learn something by ear? Is it not less work to start out sight-reading something, commit it to memory, and then play it by ear? That would assume one knows how to sight-read.

So, is it faster to learn to sight-read and then use that skill as opposed to trying to learn a song accurately by ear? Obviously, both methods can produce the exact same results based on the sheet music being correct to begin with.

The answer would be different for different people I assume

Billy

+1
I would say the intended purpose is critical. Playing for one’s own enjoyment is one thing, playing at a top studio to secure a spot in the “inner circle” is quite something else.

Since I play my instruments basically for my own enjoyment, I’d rather play the piece with less accuracy than the original artist but with my own interpretation rather than playing it note-for-note spot-on with all the space for interpretation squeezed out. Of course, my approach will never land me a spot in the inner circle, and that’s ok.

But as I utilize tab more and more, I do find it rewarding to “steal” certain phrases or notes and incorporate them into my recorded interpretations. The important thing for me is to just be in the game and have fun.

If I were to advise a youngster, I’d say get formal training, learn to sight read and learn all the theory you can.

That assumes you can get a good transcription of what you're trying to duplicate.

These days, stem splitting software is much better than it was, so you can hear parts that were buried in the mix. So learning by ear still has an edge there.

Plus, the person who came up with the part in the first place wasn't reading a transcription of the part.

It also means you care about being able to duplicate something exactly. That's never been a goal of mine. If I can play the part so the arrangement works, I consider it a success. YMMV, which is one of the many, many reasons I'll never be in a cover band.

I agree with both Steve and David's statements. In the pop world, it is generally not necessary to play any piece of music note for note.

However many riffs and series of notes, both complex and simple, define a piece of music.

The more simplistic it is, the greater the need to play it note for note.

There is only one set of notes that defines Smoke On The Water. You don't need much ear training to duplicate that riff. Something like the opening riff to Riders On The Storm, on the other hand, is pretty complex to play if you are not a very skilled keyboard player. It does not lend itself to interpretation; otherwise, it just does not sound like Riders On The Storm.

The real reason for my question is that I am trying to make a decision if I should put in the work to learn to sight-read sheet music accurately and up to speed at this late date.

I can sit here for four or five days and learn Whiter Shade Of Pale note for note by ear. If that were the only song I ever wanted to learn, then by ear would be the fastest way. The issue is that I will want to learn other pieces of music note for note or at least the signature licks that define them in the future.

All of this is based on the even more basic question of whether I want to continue to be involved in music in the same way I have been in the past.

Most likely, I will acquire some new skills and continue with many of the old ones.

Then there is the possibility I will just go fishing...lol

Billy

If you've realized the benefit of being able to read music I'd strongly encourage continuing.
It helps you develop in so many ways.

It doesn't prevent you from putting your own spin on things, in fact it'll probably make you better at it.
If you can already play by ear, before you know it you'll make the relationship and reading will come quicker as you can hear the notes you read.
Like you said, there are times when it will save you time (a precious resource) so investing a little, like most things, will pay off in the long run.
It doesn't mean you have to stop playing by ear/feel, you just have another tool to pull off the bench when needed.

/5 stars: would recommend!

Well. I have been considering taking some formal or perhaps informal piano/keyboard lessions.

I would even like to have a student ID as that would save me money on several things, and perhaps put me in cantact with people I would otherwise never meet.

Been doin a lot of thinking in my advancing age...lol

Billy

I see I need to make a correction.

If I were to advise a youngster anyone, I’d say get formal training, learn to sight read and learn all the theory you can.

Billy, from your post I assume you can read some music. If so I would like to make a suggestion.
Buy fake book and an accompanying fake book disk from Notes' Norton Music. Pick a song from the disk, turn to the proper page in the fake book, and play along with the disk. Do this a few times via a different song each time and your reading will improve. In fact I have to get back to doing this myself.

When I was teaching guitar and bass I would young people had no choice buy to read music and eventually learn some theory. The "bucket list" people, virtually all retired people, had a choice to go that route or just learn a few chords and songs. Teenagers whom wanted to shred or thinking they could take 3 lessons and be on tour I said I'm not the teacher you want or need.

Good luck

Hey Mario

Learning to sight read involves many parts. Playing with a metronome can help you visualize what a quarter note duration should sound like at 120 BPM, for example.

However, the physical coordination between the right and left hand and issues with the way a human hand is designed make playing what you may be able to read difficult for everyone.

Single-note sight reading in the treble cleft is not super difficult for me, except when notes are placed more than one octave above or below the staff. Recognizing chords in all the roots and two other inversions is not so easy for me. Truthfully, there is a hell of a lot to learn.

I have never had piano instruction, so I need to improve my basic piano skills and sight-reading.

Some of the learning happens almost automatically. You hear a piece of music that contains a quarter note rest for example, and you see the rest on the sheet music and relate the symbol to what you hear.

I am glad I have pretty good hearing recognition of musical notes. It will certainly make learning to sight-read better a lot easier.

For me, there are not so many "mountains" to get over in music. There are just a million hills that stretch beyond the visible horizon.

Billy

Sounds like your point of view is that of a guitar player.
Plenty of great guitar players never learn to read. (Wes Montgomery)
Some great ones learn later in their careers (Chet Atkins).

Most other instruments start with sight reading. Piano, Clarinet, Bassoon, Violin, etc.

An understanding of harmony may be more important that sight reading if playing non-classical music on guitar .
A well written bar by bar chord chart arrangements may be all you need.
I couldn't imagine reading a guitar chart where all the chords were spelled out note for note. Sounds like torture.
For me comping chords to a guitar chart is mostly figuring out what notes you can leave out or need to avoid for what the chart calls for.
The first few times through a chart can be a bit of re-writing the parts.
That job is about simplifying.
Personally I don't really think about notes on a staff. I think numerically, major, minor, dominat for the chord quality mostly. Nashville Numbers for the changes.

As a bass player I've read a lot of bass charts that were flat out terrible.
If you played them note for note you'd never get asked back. All roots ,all quarter notes.
A bar by bar chord chart (like a guitar chart) is much more helpful imo.

For my instruments (bass & guitar) reading may be less important than understanding harmony.

Nevertheless, when I'm learning the head of a new tune on guitar I do wish I was a better sight reader.

That probably didn't help at all.

Happy Holidays.

As a child, I started with piano. A classical teacher who taught her students to sight read, discouraged to a lesser degree, the use of playing by ear but didn't get very upset over the ones who did play some things by ear. She also was big on music theory and wanted her students to have a solid grasp of the theory behind the music.

I really didn't have a desire to learn to sight read the music. I could use the sheet music to figure out the melody and chords but when it came down to it, I preferred to play by ear.

I recall one particular day when the teacher would, at the end of the lesson, give me the new song to work on for the following week. She would play it so I knew what it was supposed to sound like. I went home and because I really liked the song, I sat down and started to work on learning it. I worked hard on it using the sheet music and by the end of the week and the next lesson, I had that song nailed down. I walked in to the lesson and couldn't wait for Mrs Leigh to as me to play that song. And when she did, I played it without a single flubbed note. I was proud. When I finished, she sat there for several seconds and didn't say a word. Then she said... That was really good. You must have worked hard on it. Then she said I want you to play it again for me but this time, I want you to play what's on the sheet music. Oooops..... Yeah, I had it close but it wasn't what was on the sheet music. So much for not reading it.

I have played the piano and learned to play the guitar and mostly by ear, especially the guitar. I played drums in the school band and orchestra..... playing drums by the sheet music was boring. I've always been an ear player and prefer it. I can read the notes, but I can not and have no desire to play by sight.

Another quick story..... At a church I attended and played guitar in the music program, there were 3 folks involved in the program who were piano players. Two of them were masterclass musicians and could read anything in any key and play sight unseen for the first time like they had been playing it forever. They would look at it for a couple of seconds and then play it without any mistakes. The other lady was good but not at that level. After rehearsal we'd often just mess around ... the drummer, bass player and myself, jamming but the ladies never joined in. We'd be like, lets jam a 1,4,5 in A major. When I questioned them, they had no real clue what I was talking about. If they didn't have sheet music they were lost.

But when it comes to learning..... just do what you think is best. I never say don't learn to read. You should at least have a basic knowledge of the musical staff and the notes and their values and theory. Theory is best learned with a piano. It's really easier to understand on the piano ....at least for me. it was. No matter which way you choose or combination thereof, the only thing that will work is to spend lots of time doing it. Have fun or it's not going to happen.

If it wasn't fun, I don't think any of us would have done this beyond grade school.
Well, except maybe for the chicks, but other than that ..
/kidding, I never seem to get 'chicks' .. but I sure have fun

Do you think the intro to this song could be learned by ear? I assume a very skilled B3 player could.
I also think having the sheet music would be a distinct advantage, as it would significantly reduce the time needed to learn it.
It's from a Tab Benoit song called "Nice And Warm." Paul English plays the intro on B3.


Perhaps I should have posed the question in the thread differently.

"What is the least time-consuming and least difficult way to learn to duplicate a piece of music note for note and play that piece of music on a software emulation program of a B3 organ with a MIDI keyboard controller? "

Other issues.
I sometimes look at the sheet music for some guitar parts both in standard notation and TAB. I am not skilled enough to play that part live and up to speed without studying it, nor would I typically want to. Sight reading for guitar or other string instruments is not a simple skill to learn but people do it every day.

I do not think gaining more musical education and skill sets will make one less creative or that there is any real downside. There is some truth to the fact that certain music universities leave an identifiable "stamp" on their students.

Billy

I concur with both statements. I’m still learning every day. I can also identify weaknesses in big band musicians I encounter who graduated from the famous music schools in the northeast.

OK, that is different...

... and you've moved the goalpost again.

Some instruments lend themselves to written notation. The piano and organ are excellent examples of this, because there aren't those many "moving parts" to work with. Notation that captures the notes, pedaling and dynamics does a good job capturing all the elements of the performance. For keyboard instruments, it's helpful to have accurate fingering (i.e., which finger to use on the keys, but this may need to be modified depending on the player's reach.

On the other hand, for a lead guitar there can be a lot on musical information that's not captured by traditional notation, and is difficult to capture in even in tablature. Some things aren't captured in notation, like amp settings. The best way to learn is to treat the tablature as a general roadmap, in combination with a recording of the performance.

The best notation is the one that allows you to accurately recreate the original performance. Since you're talking about being able to play live, you're not going to use that notation while performing the music. Notation is only a temporary tool.

Sight reading is hugely useful. But you don't need to be able to sight read in real time in order to use written notation. You do need to know the basics. For example, an F# in a key signature means all Fs in the music are played as F#s, and an accidental stays in effect for the duration of the bar. Beginning players often add in accidentals to all notes to remind themselves.

Obviously, learning to sight read will allow you to perform lots of new material faster. But if you take your time, you can memorize music that's notationally difficult to read without being able to sight read it in real time.

Being able to sight read means that you can spend more time learning the music instead of deciphering the notation.

Music theory can be extremely helpful for memorizing a piece. For example, if you see chordal arpeggios, harmonic progressions, pentatonic scales and so on, the piece of music becomes something more than hundreds of random notes to learn, but instead a realization of musical ideas within a context. The larger the chunk, the less information has to be memorized.

Once you've memorized chord shapes on an instrument, it's easy to see them in notation and tie them to the muscle memory of where they are on your instrument.

As far as learning parts quickly and accurately, it boils down to the same thing for every instrument:

1. Have an accurate representation of the performance (standard notation, tab, etc.).
2. Be competent in the techniques required to perform the piece (fingering, bends, etc.).
3. Slow and accurate performance of the music, broken into small, learnable parts.
4. Playing the parts so they connect smoothly.
5. Once a slow, accurate performance is obtained, progressively adding speed until it's up to tempo.